Page images
PDF
EPUB

bery, murder, conspiracy, or other offence, of what nature or kind soever, committed upon the sea, or in any haven, river, creek, or place where the admiral or admirals hath or have power, authority, or jurisdiction; and thereupon (if such commissioner or commissioners, justice or justices of the peace, shall see cause,) by any warrant or warrants under his or their hand and seal or hands and seals, to cause the person or persons charged in such information or informations to be apprehended and committed to safe custody, to remain in such custody until discharged in due course of law, or until bailed, in cases in which bail may by law be taken.

7 GEO. IV. c. 64.

An Act for improving the Administration of Criminal Justice in England.

WHEREAS it is expedient to define under what circumstances persons may be admitted to bail in cases of felony, and to make better provision for taking examinations, informations, bailments, and recognizances, and returning the same to the proper tribunals: And whereas the technical strictness of criminal proceedings might in many instances be relaxed, so as to ensure the punishment of the guilty, without depriving the accused of any just means of defence; and the administration of justice in that part of the united kingdom called England might in other respects be rendered more effectual: be it therefore enacted

admitted to

charge of

who may not.

23

H. 6. c. 9.)

by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That Who may be where any person shall be taken on a charge of bail on a felony or suspicion of felony, before one or more felony, and justice or justices of the peace, and the charge (3 Ed. 1. c. 15. shall be supported by positive and credible evidence of the fact, or by such evidence as, if not explained or contradicted, shall, in the opinion of the justice or justices, raise a strong presumption of the guilt of the person charged, such person shall be committed to prison by such justice or justices, in the manner hereinafter mentioned. But if there shall be only one justice present, and the whole evidence given before him shall be such as neither to raise a strong presumption of guilt nor to warrant the dismissal of the charge, such justice shall order the person charged to be detained in custody until he or she shall be taken before two justices at the least; and where any person so taken, or any person in the first instance taken before two justices of the peace, shall be charged with felony or on suspicion of felony, and the evidence given in support of the charge shall, in their opinion, not be such as to raise a strong presumption of the guilt of the person charged, and to require his or her committal; or such evidence shall be adduced on behalf of the person charged, as shall in their opinion weaken the presumption of his or her guilt, but there shall notwithstanding appear to them, in either of such cases, to be sufficient ground for judicial

M. c. 13.

2 & 3 P. & M. c. 10.

Before any

person

charged with

inquiry into his or her guilt; the person charged shall be admitted to bail by such two justices, in the manner hereinafter mentioned. Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require any such justice or justices to hear evidence on behalf of any person so charged as aforesaid, unless it shall appear to him or them to be meet and conducive to the ends of justice to hear the same.

II. And whereas it is expedient to amend and extend the provisions of two acts, the first passed in the first and second years of the reign of King 1 & 2 P. & Philip and Queen Mary, intituled "An act appointing an order to justices of peace for the bailment of prisoners," and the second passed in the second and third years of the same reign, intituled "An act to take examination of prisoners suspected of manslaughter or felony:" be it therefore enacted, That the two justices of the peace before they shall admit to bail, and the justice or felony, &c. justices before he or they shall commit to prison, any person arrested for felony or on suspicion of justices shall felony, shall take the examination of such person, writing the and the information upon oath of those who shall examination, &c. and bind know the facts and circumstances of the case, appear at the and shall put the same, or as much thereof as shall be material, into writing. And the two justices shall certify such bailment in writing. And every such justice shall have authority to bind by recognizance all such persons as know or declare any thing material touching any such felony or suspicion of felony, to appear at the

ed or com

mitted, the

take down in

witnesses to

trial.

ness.

[ocr errors]

interview with the gaoler the prisoner said that he would tell him all about it; the gaoler told him not to say any thing which he wished the magistrates not to know, as it would be his duty immediately to tell them of it; the prisoner said that he wished it, and then gave the details of the murder: the judges were unanimously of opinion that this confession was receivable in evidence. R. v. Gilham, R. & M. 186. Where a constable told a prisoner, If you will tell where the property is, you shall see your wife," Patteson, J., held that this was not such an inducement as to exclude the evidence of what the prisoner said. R. v. Lloyd, 6 Car. & P. 393. And where a threat or promise is used, it must appear to have been holden out by some person concerned in the apprehending, examining, or prosecuting the prisoner, or by the person to whom the confession is made. Thus, where, upon a man being apprehended for larceny, several of his neighbours admonished him to tell the truth, and consider his family, and he thereupon made a confession to the constable: the judges held this confession to be receivable in evidence, because the inducement to confess was not holden out or sanctioned by any person who had any concern in the busiR. v. Row, R. & R. 153. Upon the trial of a girl for the murder of a bastard child, it appeared that a woman who was present when the surgeon was attending her, mentioned that she had advised her to confess, and the girl then made a confession to the surgeon: Park, J., and Hullock, B., held that the confession was receivable in evidence, because the inducement to confess was holden out by a person who had no authority whatever to do so; if it had been by the constable or prosecutor, or the like, it would be otherwise. R. v. Gibbons, 1 Car. & P. 97, and see R. v. Tyler, id. 129. But where a girl, being apprehended for the murder of her child, was left by the constable in the custody of a woman, who told her that she had better tell the truth, otherwise it would lie upon her, and the man would go free; upon which she made a confession to the woman: J. Parke and Taunton, JJ., held this confession not receivable, as it was made in consequence of an inducement held out to the prisoner by a person who had her in custody. R. v. Enoch, 5 Car. & P. 539. And where the committing magistrate told the prisoner that if he would make a disclosure, he would do all he could for him, and the prisoner afterwards made a disclosure to the turnkey of the gaol: Parke, J., held that it was not receivable in evidence after the promise holden out by the magistrate, more especially as the turnkey had not given any previous caution to the prisoner. R. v. Cooper, 5 Car. & P. 535. But if after an inducement by threat or promise has been holden out to a prisoner to confess, and before any confession

K

actually made, the prisoner be undeceived as to the promise or threat, and assured that he has nothing to hope from the one or fear from the other, any confession he makes afterwards will be receivable in evidence. Where a man, committed for murder, was told by a magistrate that provided he was not the person who struck the fatal blow, he would use all his endeavours and influence to prevent any ill consequences to him if he would disclose all he knew of the murder; and the magistrate wrote upon the subject to the secretary of state; but upon learning from him that mercy could not be extended to the prisoner, he informed the pri soner of it; afterwards the prisoner made a confession before the coroner, but he was previously told by him that any confession or admission he should make would be given in evidence against him at the trial, and that no hope or promise of pardon could be held out to him: Littledale, J., held clearly that this confession was receivable in evidence. R. v. Cleeves, 4 Car. & P. 221. So, upon trial of a girl for administering poison, it appeared that she was threatened by her mistress that if she did not tell all about it that night, a constable should be sent for the next morning, to take her before the magistrates; and she made a statement accordingly, which the judge refused to receive in evidence; but it appeared also that the constable was actually sent for the next morning, and took her into custody, and that whilst on the way to the magistrates, in his custody, she made another confession to him: Bosanquet, J., held this latter confession to be admissible in evidence, for at the time the prisoner made it, the inducement was at an end. R. v. Richards, 5 Car. & P. 318. So where constables had induced a prisoner to confess, by telling him that his companions had "split," and he might as well do so; but afterwards, upon this appearing before the magistrate who took the examination, he informed the prisoner that his confessing would do him no good, but that he would be committed to prison to take his trial: Denman, C. J., held that a confession by the prisoner to the magistrate, after this caution, was receivable in evidence. R. v. Howes, 6 Car. & P. 404.

But even in cases where the confession of a prisoner is not receivable in evidence, on account of its having been obtained by means of some threat or promise, any discovery made in consequence of it may be proved; and in such a case, the counsel for the prosecution is merely allowed to ask the witness, whether, in consequence of something he heard from the prisoner, he found any thing and where, &c. and the witness in answer can only give evidence of the fact of the discovery. In one case, indeed, the judges are reported to have gone further. The case was thus: the pri

« EelmineJätka »